Emily Gonzalez
Tucker
Neto
N.E.W. Core
A Solution to Municipal Waste Accumulation
The United States’s predictions for the amount of landfill disposal rates per year was greatly underestimated in the year of 2012. The prediction of 262 million tonnes of landfill waste was off by 140 million tonnes (Estimates of solid waste disposal rates and reduction targets for landfill gas emissions Powell, Townsend, Zimmerman). The rapid accumulation of compostable and recyclable waste in landfills resulting from the disorganization of waste is causing other landfill waste to produce greenhouse gases and take longer to decompose; however, if a receptacle that could automatically organize waste was used in public spaces, it would significantly reduce the manual labor needed to organize waste.
Recyclable plastics and food waste are taking up space in landfills, producing methane emissions that warm the atmosphere. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, municipal solid waste (MSW), or anything found in a landfill, has been found to be 30% paper and 13% plastics (Environmental Protection Agency). This data points to how landfills are being built to towering heights. Both of these materials can be recycled, but since plastic regulations are different depending on the area, consumers do not know what to do with their plastics and there are several misconceptions about recycling paper. Even when people do know what to do with their waste, they may still not dispose of it properly. Dr. Jean C. Buzby, Chief of the Diet, Safety, and Health Economics Branch Economic Research Service at the USDA reports that in the United States in 2010, around 19% of food lost at the consumer level were fruit and 22% vegetables. This adds up to 12.5 billion pounds fruit and 18.2 billion pounds of vegetables lost in 2010(Overview of Food Loss in the United States). All of this produce could be composted into fertilizer and reused again. Instead, it is being thrown into the garbage so that it resides with other MSW. These billions of pounds of food, when crushed under other billions of pounds of paper, plastic and other waste, produce methane. The University of San Diego’s website, CalSpace, explains that methane is a greenhouse gas, that is produced under certain conditions when there is not sufficient oxygen. Just like carbon dioxide, it affects the warming of the atmosphere, but unlike the effects of carbon, a decrease in methane would have immediate effects(CalSpace). Since there is not a lot of oxygen under other waste, instead of food just decomposing, it creates methane. If people were able to immediately reduce the amount of food that went to landfills, this would have an immediate effect on the atmosphere. Landfills are full to the brim with paper, plastics and food because consumers choose to throw away their trash instead of any alternatives as it is the most convenient option.
Even when consumers make conscious choices about where their waste goes, they may end up throwing away waste into the wrong compartments, leading to unnecessary MSW. Many consumers are unsure what to do with their plastics, which is clear from the statistic that “9.5 percent of plastics were recycled in 2013” (Environmental Protection Agency). There are many misconceptions about which materials are recyclable. The reality is that it varies by area, so the consumer would have to conduct research to find out what material their product is made out of and whether they should recycle it. Most consumers do not have the time to research everything that they throw away, so they throw it into the trash bin and it ends up in a landfill.
Source: Biocycle
Article: State of Composting in the U.S.
The pie chart above displays the percentage of different composting facilities in the United States. The majority of composting facilities recorded were for yard trimmings, while only 7% were food scraps. Many people are now aware that composting is an option, but they still do not compost food. Composting facilities for yard trimmings make it easy for people to put their yard waste in a bucket and not have to worry about it. They do not have this luxury with food scraps, which need to either be thrown into the trash or composted manually. MSW will continue to be on the rise as long as people do not understand that recycling plastics and composting their food is an option.
Since the majority of people are not composting or recycling their waste, it all collects in million tons of landfill waste which emits methane when kept under pressure, or releases toxic chemicals in the air when burned. After calculating the amount of waste in different landfills the EPA found that in the United States “about 258 million tons of MSW were generated. (...) over 33 million tons of MSW were combusted with energy recovery and 136 million tons were landfilled”. These million tons of waste take up space and wreak havoc on the atmosphere. More and more municipal landfills need to be created to store all of this MSW. Areas that become landfills cannot be used for much else, since the waste permeates the area. Once waste ends up in a landfill, it has very few uses. It is either left to decompose and create methane under high amounts of pressure, or it is incinerated to make more space. The Environmental Protection Agency’s findings report that municipal landfills are one of the leading contributors to methane emissions, producing 89,650,353 metric tons. Since methane is a greenhouse gas, these 89 million metric tons are contributing to global warming. If food waste was composted, it would decompose normally. When it is packed in landfills under tons of pressure, it creates methane. This means that if food waste in landfills was immediately reduced, it would have an immediate effect on climate change. Many people have been blaming other contributors such as cars and factories, but food waste is another often overlooked contributor. One of the solutions to the constant growth and need of landfills is to incinerate waste. This seems effective at first glance, but can actually be more harmful to the environment. The organization Ecocycle, which looks to make communities have ‘zero waste’ or no waste, published a paper discussing how waste-to-energy is more harmful than most conceive. Multiple studies have shown that it releases harmful chemicals such as volatile organic compounds (VOC) and greenhouse gases, among other materials. These can be hazardous for respiratory health, development, and be more likely to cause cancer. Even if all waste was burnt, 25% of it would still be ashes (Waste of Energy). This defeats many of the purposes of using waste-to-energy. It still creates greenhouse gases just like methane and can actually release more harmful materials into the atmosphere. It makes it so that instead of this waste staying in landfills, it resides in the air. It doesn’t fix the problem, it just changes the waste into a different form of matter. Even so, since the ashes need to be buried, people still have to make space for them. Incineration leads to more health and environmental problems than most people are led to believe, making it an ineffective solution. Overall, once waste leaves the garbage can, it is left to rot and spoil, decomposing and creating methane. Many attempts to rid of municipal waste have led to more problems, but if this waste was recovered in its early stages, it could be redirected to recycling and composting facilities to be more effective in helping the environment.
A solution for this problem is a disposal bucket that automatically manages waste. The magazine, The Economist reports that companies have begun in 2015 to largely invest into, “recycling infrastructure. Walmart, Coca-Cola and eight other big companies have created a $100m Closed Loop Fund, which offers zero- and low-interest loans to cities and recycling companies for everything from better bins to more efficient sorting plants” (Recycling in America: In the Bin, The Economist). Since recycling has to do more with small scale municipal landfills, local power has the most effect on recycling. This is why these large companies have invested into cities and recycling management. Even these large companies know that recycling would be the best option for them because it costs less to produce recycled materials, but cities do not have the sufficient funds to invest in recycling programs. Every city has different policies and different amounts of available workforce. Even if there are more recycling programs, people at the consumer level may still throw their waste in the wrong compartment, wasting billions of pieces of plastic. Not to mention that recycling does not include the tons of food waste put in municipal waste daily. The solution that has been proposed is a waste disposal container that automatically sorts waste depending on the molecular composition of the material. The bucket would have three compartments: one that washes recycling, one for compostable food waste and one for MCW. The container for food waste would automatically spin every few hours, keeping the new waste at the bottom and the soil at the top. The consumer will put their waste on a platform with a molecular sensor. Depending on the molecular composition, it will light up and open the corresponding compartment. The effects of this solution would be gradual, yet effective. Less workers would be needed to sort through the different types of waste and the consumer would not have to think at all. This would make more types of plastic recycled because people will know if it is recyclable and more food would be composted because of the option there. Money that is used to currently invest in recycling programs and regular bucket could be used to fund this solution since the first places this would be installed would be public areas, such as parks, beaches and schools. Just having the option of composting would reduce food waste by large amounts, since that is not a current option in public areas. The bucket would require little to no management, other than being emptied once every week or so and repaired if it was damaged. Even people with no experience of recycling or composting could easily use this solution. Bringing it all together, an effective solution to reduce the amount of food waste and recyclable materials in municipal landfills is an automatic waste management on a small scale. The problem starts at the consumer level, therefore, that is where this solution lies.
The solution provided could make a substantial difference in the enourmous amounts of food and recyclable waste thrown into municipal landfills each year. Reducing the amount of food and recyclables in landfills can reduce metric tons of methane emissions and the need to burn waste. Other methods to reduce the amount of waste often look at the problem as soon as it starts off from the landfill, or assume that people are aware of recycling and composting as options. With this solution, people will not have to be aware of the problem or solutions as a whole, but can still make an unconscious effort to defeat the growth municipal landfills.
Works Cited
"The Greenhouse Gases." The Greenhouse Gases. U.C. Davis, n.d. Web. 04 Apr. 2017
EPA. Environmental Protection Agency, n.d. Web. 04 Apr. 2017.
Gunders, Dana. "Wasted: How America Is Losing Up to 40 Percent of Its Food from Farm to Fork to Landfill." NRDC. NRDC, 15 Dec. 2016. Web. 04 Apr. 2017.
"Reduce, Reuse, Recycle." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency, 04 Jan. 2017. Web. 04 Apr.
2017.
Dr. Jean Buzby, “Overview of Food Loss in the United States”. U.C. Davis. 2014. Web. 04 Apr.
2017.
"In the Bin." The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 22 Apr. 2015. Web. 04 Apr. 2017.